MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7015130429

Review of "Old Enough to Say What I Want: An Autobiography"

2000· review· en· W7015130429 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSacrificeSiblingImmigrationGrandparent
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If you're like me, a Royal Canadian Air Farce fan, then you will agree that "Old Enough to Say What I Want: An Autobiography" by Dave Broadfoot is among the most enjoyable books you'll ever read.Broadfoot delightfully describes a life that could have been stultifying.He has a survivor's knack to find and to share humour in life's pompous absurdities.This is his salvation.Salvation is the conflict in Broadfoot's life.He opens with, "I would have preferred to have been born into a family of fun-loving atheists, but that's not how it turned out."This conflict is the font of his creativity.Broadfoot loves his parents and his three sisters.He is the youngest of four, and the sole male.He is the only sibling to choose an entertainer's life.His sisters devoted their lives to missionary and evangelical works.His mother was a saintly homemaker.He was born in North Vancouver, in 1925.His parents were both born in Britain.Like many new Canadians, they came to Canada out of necessity, not by choice.Broadfoot is a first generation Canadian which creates a cultural barrier between him and his parents.Broadfoot explores his relationship with his parents and relationships within families.He asks, "to what extent must parents sacrifice their interests and values for the sake of their children?"

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.013

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207